Trump is Right, Windmills SUCK, both literally and figuratively...
Today, I came across the following article shared on facebook with a note depicting how "stupid" Trump is. The article attempts to make the following case about Trump's November 23, 2016 interview with the NY Times. The claim is that it will make you weep for our country, and "It will make you cringe, grimace and maybe even cry." Curiosity abound, I had to read on to see just what Trump could possibly be saying that's so terrible. I figure their first "example" will be the worst they could come up with, so let's start there...
Here’s an example that we probably won’t see quoted on mainstream media, or anywhere else, for that matter. This statement came in response to a question about Trump’s recent meeting with Nigel Farage. The Times reporter wanted to know if Trump had sought help in preventing the development of a wind farm near his golf course in Scotland: [This is the formatting as published by the New York Times.]
TRUMP: Oh, I see. I might have brought it up. But not having to do with me, just I mean, the wind is a very deceiving thing. First of all, we don’t make the windmills in the United States. They’re made in Germany and Japan. They’re made out of massive amounts of steel, which goes into the atmosphere, whether it’s in our country or not, it goes into the atmosphere. The windmills kill birds and the windmills need massive subsidies. In other words, we’re subsidizing wind mills all over this country. I mean, for the most part they don’t work. I don’t think they work at all without subsidy, and that bothers me, and they kill all the birds. You go to a windmill, you know in California they have the, what is it? The golden eagle? And they’re like, if you shoot a golden eagle, they go to jail for five years and yet they kill them by, they actually have to get permits that they’re only allowed to kill 30 or something in one year. The windmills are devastating to the bird population, O.K. With that being said, there’s a place for them. But they do need subsidy. So, if I talk negatively. I’ve been saying the same thing for years about you know, the wind industry. I wouldn’t want to subsidize it. Some environmentalists agree with me very much because of all of the things I just said, including the birds, and some don’t. But it’s hard to explain. I don’t care about anything having to do with anything having to do with anything other than the country.
If you were standing on 5th Avenue in New York, and some guy came up to you and said what Trump said about windmills and birds, you’d probably walk away as quickly as possible. And if you were a mental-health professional, and a guy came into your office rambling like that, might you possibly put a note in his chart about incoherent thinking, and maybe wonder if he needed medication or hospitalization?
Full Story: http://occasionalplanet.org/2016/11/27/trumps-nyt-transcript-read-weep-country/
While perhaps not the most eloquent bit of speech, it's not like Trump got the questions in advance or anything so that he could prepare a smooth and properly sanitized version like some other politicians have often gotten away with lately. So for the real question... is there any validity to his claim?
So let's look into this whole bald eagle thing. Ahhhh great! Politifact to the rescue...
In California, "the windmills are killing hundreds and hundreds of eagles." — Donald Trump on Thursday, May 26th, 2016 in a speech on energy policy
The verdict......? "MOSTLY FALSE" GREAT! Trump's wrong, he's an ass, and at best "mostly wrong". Back to bed...
Oh crap, I'm still curious to read a bit more, to at least better understand their justification to claim it's "mostly false"... Let's just jump right to the "Our Ruling" section:
Trump said that in California, windmills are killing hundreds and hundreds of eagles. The best estimate is that about 100 golden eagles die each year from collisions with wind turbine blades. The data are not perfect, but the people most concerned about the welfare of the eagles do not go along with Trump’s figure.
Trump is correct that California wind farms are a threat to eagles but not on the magnitude he suggested. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate this claim Mostly False.
HOLD ON HERE... Am I not reading this correctly??? Didn't they just completely contradict themselves in their very next sentence?!
Trump didn't say hundreds of eagles are being killed each year (as if it's still not terrible either way). BUT, apparently, this claim is mostly false and exaggerated because the "best estimate is that about 100 golden eagles die each year from collisions with wind turbine blades"!
So, I guess Politifact (like snopes, especially when it relates to politically-charged issues) is just more mainstream leftist propaganda crap as well, thanks again for the confirmation! I guess they too are fully aware of the studies that most people don't even bother reading past a headline, let alone bother to dig deeper into any claims made by the article.
And as for the punishment for killing a bald eagle? (Trump may have been a bit off here, 2 years in jail not 5, but it still doesn't materially change the point)
The 1972 amendments increased civil penalties for violating provisions of the Act to a maximum fine of $5,000 or one year imprisonment with $10,000 or not more than two years in prison for a second conviction. Felony convictions carry a maximum fine of $250,000 or two years of imprisonment. The fine doubles for an organization.
UNLESS you are a wind farm...
The rule by the Interior Department extends the length of the permits that allow farms to unintentionally kill the eagles without penalty from five to 30 years, according to department records.
Now, we've just been talking about eagles here. How many birds may really be dying each year from wind farms?
By chance (if you believe in coincidences), a timely government study claims wind farms will kill “only” 1.4 million birds yearly by 2030. This new report is just one of many, financed with taxpayers’ money, aimed at convincing the public that additional mortality caused by wind plants is sustainable. – It is not.
Full Story: http://savetheeaglesinternational.org/new/us-windfarms-kill-10-20-times-more-than-previously-thought.html
WOW! So much for protecting the environment! Sounds like just another scam, especially when considering how many tax dollars are involved... I can only wonder how many politicians must have some serious financial interests in these enterprises, whether from subsidies or other "perks". And to think, we haven't even touched upon on all the birds killed (among other problems) from subsidized solar farms!
For a bit of good news, technology may eventually come up with some cost-effective solutions for making wind turbines safer for birds. However, that may still be a ways off.
There is also some other interesting wind technology on the horizon as well, though Shimizu would first need to solve how to store such monumental amounts of energy harvested in such a short period of time:
Engineer Atsushi Shimizu says an array of his generators could power Japan for up to 50 years from a single typhoon - and considering six such storms have hit the country this year, we're talking about a lot of potential energy.
Full Story: http://www.sciencealert.com/these-typhoon-powered-wind-turbines-could-power-japan-for-50-years
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, especially when considering the true level of complexity that exists in the world. As almost always seems to be the case, it's probably best for the government to step out of the way and leave the free market to do what it does best. And that is to solve real world problems economically through clever innovation and technological progress.
As a final note, since this seems again especially apropos given how this article was kicked off over some more "Trump" hate, I felt compelled to throw this in:
And I'm not even that big of a Trump fan, but you're f'ing making me defend him. Don't you see that's why you lost?
Don't you realize that Donald Trump is the most left-leaning candidate the republicans have ever had? He even used to be a democrat for f sake!
And then I'm gonna start fighting for what I think is right again... Yay! Censorship, Political Correctness, Quotas, Affirmative Action, Race Segregation, White Guilt, Empty Science Activism, The Religion of Feminism! Social Justice really is the gift that keeps on giving, isn't it. So, there's that to look forward to!
Harsh language warning, not meant for the fragile-minded, but funny as all heck!
I used to be in the 'wind mill hauling business".
No windmills are made or moved if they are not subsidized.
What's that tell you?
Well coal and natural gas are subsidized too, what does that tell you? So is corn for ethanol. I don't see the logic behind statements like this.
What does that tell you? The people building windmills are smart and do it for as cheaply as possible, since subsidies are being handed out they want them. Only makes business sense. Same goes for any good, product, anything that receives free money. Lots of money being thrown around in the energy sector I guess.
no...coal, oil and gas, are NOT subsidized.
What? They certainly are. There is a ton of gvt money poured into all forms of energy.
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/
There are subsidies for gas/oil/coal as well, but from that link you posted, you can see that it's a drop in the bucket next to the direct expenditures in renewables. The total shown for gas+oil+coal in 2013 is $173MM, which is less than the smallest category Hydropower at $197MM. Combine the other categories (wind being the largest expenditure of all), and you're at well over $8 billion (or 98% of the total). I won't even go into the giant convoluted mess on the tax expenditure side, except to say that's still a lot different than direct expenditures, and considering how heavily taxed gasoline is, it's a bit murkier picture.
Perhaps we can agree that pretty much all these subsidies should be phased out, and the tax code should be (at minimum) "simplified" dramatically.
I would be delighted to see the federal gov't get out of the subsidy business...the wind and solar farms are but two examples with respect to why. The solar farm Tonopah incinerates the birds, the windmills chop them up...I'd rather taxpayers didn't have to shell out to pay for this wanton slaughter.
didn't even get to solar farms but yes, very true as well. thanks for adding that!
Poor birds. And the really crazy part is that all you need to do is stick a modern solar panel on the roof of every home... and problem solved. But they won't let this happen because they want to keep energy production centralised. I recently made a documentary on this subject:
You may find this interesting as well.
http://oto2.wustl.edu/cochlea/wind.html
and
http://www.electricalpollution.com/windturbines.html